Training – Drypigment.net

Travels of a Scenic Artist and Scholar: George Rivers Higgins – Plumber, Painter, and Glazier.

Woodland scene at the Georgian Theatre Royal Credited to George Rivers Higgins. From left to right: Grit Eckert, Anna Bridgeman, and Wendy Waszut-Barrett. Photograph by Mike Hume of Historic Theatre Photography.

A text panel next to the woodland scene notes that “the scenery came from the firm of George Rivers Higgins in Oxford. Higgins created stage sets to order and also kept a stock of scenery for hire.”

*Painted detail on woodland wing, credited to George Rivers Higgins.*

This basic information has been cited repeatedly, linking Higgins’ to the later form of Hinkins. Here is what was published at A History of the World :

“The Georgian Theatre (the UK’s oldest working theatre in its original form, built 1788) holds, in its display area, the oldest known theatrical scenery still in existence: the Woodland Scene. The scenery comprises 8 wooden wing flats 9ft 6ins by 3ft 6ins, 5 canvas borders and a Forest back-drop scene 13ft 1in by 10ft 2ins. All trees in the scene can be identified as specific types. On the back is painted a Blue Drawing Room, with Fire, showing a period fireplace, skirting board and panelling and a picture frame over the fireplace. The Woodland scenery was only part of a stock of 5 different scenery pieces which had been in the Hinkins family as far back as 1820. It was painted at a scene painting shop in Royston, Hertfordshire, (previously Cambridgeshire) which was set up in 1811 by a former travelling actor – George Rivers Higgins. How and why the Woodland Scene became detached from the other pieces of Hinkins scenery is not known but it was Richard Southern (a theatre architecture historian instrumental in uncovering the history of the Georgian Theatre in Richmond, North Yorks) who arranged its transfer into the care of the Theatre trustees in 1961.

While trying to track down the origin for this information, I came across the following statement in an article entitled Georgian Richmond in the theatrecrafts.com archives (https://www.theatrecrafts.com/archive/cue/cue_14_18.pdf

The article noted:

The scenery was included in “that marvelous Hayward Gallery exhibition of 1975 from whose catalogue we glean: In 1818, George Rivers Higgins, an actor and scene painter in a travelling company of players, settled in Royston and founded a decorator’s business. He became a leading light of the local Dramatic Society and was assisted and succeeded in his business by William Hinkins who had been one of His Majesty’s Servants in Norwich. By 1866 the firm of Hinkins had a large stock of stage scenery which was hired out, the nucleus of the stock supposedly being brought to Royston by Higgins in I 818.

An inventory of 1881 lists five drop scenes, three of which still exist. On the back of “The Woodland Scene” is painted a “Blue Drawing Room with Fire”, panelling and a picture over the fireplace. The flats exhibited were listed in the inventory as eight trees. This set has been frequently retouched in the last one hundred and fifty years and there are even signs that one width of canvas of the three-piece backcloth has been replaced above the second seam. The canvas of the flats appears to be original. Allowing for retouching this is the oldest scenery surviving in Britain.

The woodland scenery is now displayed in a room with a scaled down replica of a Georgian stage and is viewed under ambient lighting.”

The above excerpt was first published in a catalogue (The Hayward Gallery, 21 August to 12 October, 1975) entitled The Georgian Playhouse: Actors, Artists and Architecture, 1730-1830, written by Ian Mackintosh and Geoffrey Ashton. Mackintosh curated and designed the Hayward Gallery exhibition. Both he and David Wilmore worked as historic theatre consultants on the Georgian Theatre Royal restoration.

By this point, I was fully engaged in the story, and wanting to learn more about the lives and careers of Higgins and Hawkins. Yet, there was precious little available beyond what I have cited above.

I started with a basic Google search before turning to newspaper and genealogy databases. You could have knocked me over with a feather when this popped up: “William Hinkins, aged Thirteen Years. Binds Himself Apprentice to George Rivers Higgins of Royston. Plumber, Glazier, House and Coah Painter. For Seven Years.” The contract was dated 1828.

*Listing for contract at Abe Books, August 17, 2024.*

*A screen grab of the contract for sale, August 17, 2024.*

Timing is everything, and I immediately sent an email to both the Georgian Theatre Royal and David Wilmore (who secured the document). Then, I took a screen shot of the contract and started deciphering the text. Here is my transcription:

This Indenture Winesseth That William Hinkins aged thirteen years and upwards as well of his own free will and consent as by and with the consent and approbation of his Mother Catherine Hinkins of the Parish of Bassingbourn in the County of Cambridge widow, testified by her being a party to and executing these presents –doth put himself Apprentice to George Rivers Higgins of Royston in the County of Hertford of Plumber, Glazier, Coach and House Painter, to learn his Art and with him after the Manner of an Apprentice to serve from the day of the date hereof until the full End and Term of Seven Years from thence next following to be fully complete and ended During which Term the said Apprentice his Master faithfully shall serve his secrets keep his lawful commands everywhere gladly do he shall do no damage to his said Master nor see to be done of others but to his Power shall tell or forthwith give warning to his said Master of the same he shall not waste the Goods of his said Master – nor lend them unlawfully to any he shall not commit fornication nor contract Matrimony within the said Term he shall not play at Cards or Dice Tables for any other unlawful Games whereby his said Master may have any loss with his own goods or others during the said Term with out License of his said Master he shall neither buy nor sell he shall not haunt Taverns or Play houses nor absent himself from his said Master’s service day or night unlawfully But in all things as a faithful Apprentice he shall behave himself towards his said Master and all his during the said Term. And the said George Rivers Higgins doth hereby to himself his executor and administrators Covenant and agree to and with the Catherine Hinkins her executors and administrators and also to and with the said apprentice in consideration of the sum of ten shillings of lawful money of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland to him in hand paid by the said Catherine Hinkins and of the source of the said apprentice and the Covenant herein after contained on the part of his Mother in manner following (that to say) that the said George Rivers Higgins- his said Aprentice in the Art of a Plumber Glazier Coach and House Painter which he useth by the best means that he can shall teach and Instruct or cause to be taught and instructed Finding unto the said Apprentice Sufficient Meat Drink and Wearing Apparel [Lodging and all other Necessaries was crossed out] during the said Term and the said Catherine Hinkins for her considerations aforesaid doth hereby for herself, her heirs, executors and administrators covenant and agree to and with the said George Rivers Higgins his executors administrators and assigned that shew the Lodging Medical Attendance and all other necessaries whatsoever and save himself and keep indemnified the said George Rivers Higgins his executors and administrators of and from the same And for the true performance of all and every the said Covenants and Agreements either of the said Parties bindeth himself and herself unto the other by these Presents In Witness where the Parties above named to these Indentures [the word interchangeably is crossed out] have put their Hands and Seals the thirty first day of December and in the ninth Year of the Reign of our Sovereign Lord George the Fourth by the Grave of God of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland King Defender of the Faith in the Year of our Lord One Thousand Eight Hundred and Twenty eight.

[Signed on the bottom right side]

Geo. Rivers Higgins, Caroline Hinkins, William Hinkins

[Fine print on bottom left side: NB. The Indenture Cov’Article or Contract must bear the day it is executed and what Money or other thing is given or Contracted for with the Clerk or Apprentice must be inserted in Words at Length otherwise the Indenture will be void the Master or Mistress forfeit Fifty Pounds and another Penalty & the Apprentice be disabled to follow in the Trade or be made Free]

Well, that certainly linked Higgins to Hinkins who later takes over the business. For years, I have read about art apprenticeships, but never fully considered the legalities; a contract that was negotiated and signed, as well as the similar wording for indentured servitude. We seldom stop to think about the lengthy commitment and restrictions placed on a very young person. All goes well if the “Master” is a good person. It is also easy to see how this type of agreement could become an abusive arrangement. Hawkins was very lucky when his mother apprenticed him to Higgins.

I also want to put the profession of “Plumber, Glazier and Painter” in context. The three trades were frequently combined in early-19^th-century; even appearing as a single category in business directories.

Here is George Rivers Higgins listed in Pigot’s Directory for 1830:

*Listing in 1830 Pigot’s Directory – Royston.*

Side note: I have also found the names of several women who were identified with this trade!

In regard to the 1830 Pigot’s Directory listing, however, George Rivers Higgins and James Hawkins were working together that year (see above image). Both were listed in the “Painters, Plumbers and Glaziers” living on High Street. Hawkins had previously worked in Gloucestershire, Wales, and was listed in the “Painters, Plumbers & Glaziers” section of the 1822 directory for that area. Hawkins was still working in Royston in 1840, when his shop burned to the ground (Cambridge Weekly News 18 July 1840 p. 4).

Like me, you may be interested in the whole plumber-aspect of Higgins’ trade. When I first saw the word plumber in the apprenticeship agreement, my interest was peaked. I thought back to the responsibilities of a nineteenth-century barber, like pulling teeth and conducting surgeries.

A plumber’s trade is described in numerous nineteenth-century manuals, all identifying the tradesmen as individuals who were responsible for the casting and working of lead. Here is an 1806 illustration of a plumber from The Book of Trades, or Library of Useful Arts, Volume 1. This illustration and a few other interestingly tidbits can be were included in The Plumber’s Craft in Past Times

1806 illustration of a plumber from *The Book of Trades, or Library of Useful Arts,* Volume 1.

The grouping of plumber, painting and glazier now made much more sense to me, as all three fell within the realm if chemistry. Also, painters and paint manufacturers handled great quantities of lead for many projects. I have frequently come across nineteenth-century scenic artists who got their start as a chemist or druggist.

This combination of trades that overlap also speaks to a diversification of skills to maintain and adequate workload. Even now, stability of employment can be based on a diversity of skill. This was key to the successful careers of many 19th and 20th century scenic artists.

In my mind, I could easily understand why Catherine Hinkins (1786-1875) apprenticed her 13-yrs.old son William to George Rivers Higgins. For further context, in 1828 Catherine was also at a turning point, having lrecently become a widow. On Sept. 5, 1827, Joseph Hinkins (b. 1789) passed away, leaving Catherine with three children to raise (William, Elizabeth and Lydia). I found baptismal records for each, but there may have been more children.

Back to the story…at 13 yrs. old, William Hinkins was apprenticed to 38 yrs. old George Rivers Higgins.

When all was said and done, Catherine made a good choice; Higgins was beloved by the community in Royston. Here is what the Amateur Musical Society published in local newspapers when Higgins passed away in 1861:

His love of art was unbounded; his generosity was ever active; and his influence for good in the noble cause of music was exercised and felt in Royston during a period approaching half a century.

This also suggests that Higgins moved to Royston sometime after 1811, as he had not quite reached the 50 years mark as a citizen. As far as William Hinkins was concerned…

In 1835, William completed his apprenticeship, continuing to work for Higgins for at least the next eight years. In 1843, Hinkins married Maria Howard (1813-1888) in Royston on October 26, 1843. The couple raised at least five children between 1848 and (William Howard, Louisa L., Clara Maria, Francis Robert, and Jane A.).

William Hinkins, Sr. became “heir apparent” to Higgin’s business, with his two sons, William Howard Hinkins and Francis R. Hinkins following in his footsteps. Hinkins ran a thriving business, and by 1871 was employing fifteen men and two boys. So who was George Rivers Higgins?

Here is what I have tracked down about his life and career…

George Rivers Higgins was the son of George Higgins and Harriot Annett. His parents were married at St. James Westminster, Piccadilly, London, on April 24, 1783. On March 7, 1786, they celebrated the birth of their first child – Mary Higgins. On January 2, 1889, the celebrated the birth of Sarah D. Higgins, with George Jr. Higgins arriving on 23 May, 1790. All three baptisms were registered at St. George, Hanover Square, in London.

George Higgins, Sr., worked as a chemist (druggist) in London. This makes so much sense in terms of why George Rivers HIggins became a plumber, painter and glazier. The chemist/druggist trade that was intimately linked to paint production in the 18^th, 19^th, and even early 20^th, centuries.

Here is just one example to illustrate my point – a charming letterhead from Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, c. 1901.

Painting has always been closely connected with chemistry. Whether it was in the actual creation of a paint, or how certain colors interacted, artists must intimately understand what they are handling, or their paintings fail over time.

Chemistry meant that the paint industry often partnered with other trades, even undertaking. Here is a photograph that has always makes me chuckle – decorative painting and funeral supplies.

*Photograph from the Okanagon Historical Society, Washington.*

Both trades used many of the same chemicals.

Now, I have spent quite a bit of time going down one particular rabbit hole that concerns the life and career of George Higgins Sr. Maybe a little too much time…

I have looked as various individuals with the name, cross-checking the locations and dates. I think that his father was one of four London Correspondence Society (LCS) members charged in a plot to assassinate the King. The plan to shoot the King in the neck with a poisoned dart, thus becoming known as the Pop-Gun Plot.

George Higgins (Sr.), Paul Thomas LeMaitre, John Smith and Thomas Upton were arrested in the fall of 1794. Robert Thomas Crossfield was arrested the following summer. Although LeMaitre, Smith and Higgins spent time in Newgate prison, there was insufficient evidence to convict… and… the chief witness was dead.

George Higgins (Sr.) was acquitted in May 1796. Here is a recent article about the event published on May 11, 2024 to Past Tense: https://pasttense.co.uk/2024/05/11/today-in-london-spycops-history-1796-popgun-assassination-plot-frameup-defendants-acquitted/

The dates of the Pop-gun Plot match the George Rivers Higgins family timeline, including their move tp the country. Later in 1796, newspaper articles referred to Higgins Sr. as “George Higgins, late of London.” Now this also may have been the reason why George Higgins, Jr. consistently used his middle name, going by George Rivers Higgins and G. Rivers Higgins throughout his career.

Previous historians suggest that George Higgins Jr. joined up with a theatrical touring group, settling in Royston about 1811. The earliest mention in local newspapers that I have come across is his marriage announcement from eight years later. On Oct. 13, 1819, Higgins married Ann Smith (b. 1796). Their marriage was announced in local papers, listing the couple as “Mr. George Rivers Higgins, painter, of Royston, to Miss Smith of the same place.”

Other than directory listings and census reports, George Rivers Higgins’ name seldom made news. However, the year before he accepted William Hinkins as an apprentice, Higgins placed the following advertisement in The Cambridge and Hertford Independent Press (19 May 1827):

To Plumbers, Painters and Glaziers. Wanted, in a constant place of work, a steady Man who thoroughly understands the above three branches. Apply if by letter (post-paid) to G. R. Higgins, Royston, Herts. A Reference will be Required.

Higgins was consistently listed in Pigot’s Directory for Cambridgeshire (Royston), often one of four or more individuals listed in the “Painters, Plumbers, and Glaziers” section.

Census reports list George and Ann as a childless couple in Royston. Although they did not celebrate the birth of their own children, George Rovers Higgins was cherished by his wife’s family. Ann’s older brother, George Smith (1791-1869), even named his second son Rivers Richard Smith (b. 1841). His first son was named George Smith. The two families remained extremely close over the years, and it was Rivers R. Smith who settled Ann Higgin’s estate upon her passing. Rivers Smith followed his own father’s footsteps, working as a Wine and Seed Merchant in Royston.

George Rivers Higgins was quite active in Royston’s Mechanic’s Institute too. On Dec. 10, 1842, the Hertfordshire Mercury reported:

Royston Mechanic’s Institute – A very interesting lecture on the varieties of the human race was delivered at the British School-room, on Wednesday last by R. G. Latham, Esq., A. M., Fellow of King’s College, Cambridge, and Professor of English literature, in University College, London. After a lucid description of the physical peculiarities which distinguished the different tribes f our species from each other, as displayed in the varied conformation of the skull, the colour of the skin and eyes, the nature of the hair, &c. Mr. Latham gave an eloquent and highly interesting sketch of the origin, the geographical position, the history, the language, the intellectual progress and discoveries, the present state, and probably future political destiny of the great classes of mankind. The lecture was illustrated by a series of beautiful designs representing the most striking varieties of the form of the skull, together with characteristic portraits of individuals belonging to some of those tribes least known to the audience, as the North American Indian, the Malay, &c. These drawings were gratuitously executed expressly for the lecture by one of the members of the Royston Mechanics Institute, Mr. George Rivers Higgins, to whose talent and liberality they do equal credit.

In 1851 Census, Higgins listed that he employed two men and two boys. At the time, he was 61 yrs. old, and doing quite well; successful enough to employ two servants in his home.

In 1855, the Post Office Directory still listed him as a plumber, painter and glazier, situated in the same home/work address on High Street. He passed away six years later, just before the census was taken. The 1861 Census listed Ann Higgins living along with a cook and servant. She died three years later.

When George Rivers Higgins passed on Jan. 27, 1861, he left an estate valued under £1500. The English & Wales National Probate Calendar listed, “The will of George Rivers Higgins, later of Royston in the County of Hertford. Coach and House Painter deceased who died 27 January 1861 at Royston aforesaid was proved at the Principal Registry by the oath of Ann Higgins of Royston aforesaid Widow the relict the sole Executrix.”

Ann didn’t outlive her husband by much, passing away three years later. On Feb. 20, 1864, the Cambridge Weekly News reported, “Higgins – Feb 17, at Royston, after many years suffering, borne with exemplary patience and resignation, Ann, widow of the late George Rivers Higgins, in her 73^rd year.”

Her listing in the National Probate Calender reported:

March 10, 1864. The Will with a Codicil of Ann Higgins late of Royston in the County of Hertford. Widow deceased who died 17 February 1864 at Royston aforesaid was proved at the Principal Registry by the oaths of Rivers Richard Smith of Royston aforesaid Wine and Seed Merchant, the Nephew and Spicer Crowe of the Town and Country of Cambridge Gentleman the Executors. Effects under £800.

George Rivers Higgins’ name was mentioned again when their property sold in 1870. On Jan. 22, the Cambridge Weekly News announced:

Royston, Herts. Messrs. Nash & Son are instructed by the Proprietor to SELL BY AUCTION, on Wednesday, 26^th January, 1870, at the Bull Inn, Royston at 4 for 5 o’clock. Those very Eligible Freehold Business Premises, situate in the High-street, Royston, in which the Painter’s, Plumber’s, and Decorator’s business was for many years carried on by the late George Rivers Higgins, comprising Front Shop, with double show windows; dining-room and kitchen offices, paved court-yard, with passage entrance on the ground floor; good cellarage on the basement; dining-room, with bow window, 4 bedrooms, W. C., paint-shop, and office on the upper floors. May be viewed on application to the tenant, Mr. William Hinkins. Particulars and conditions of sale may be had at the place of sale; Mr. Henry Baker, Solicitor, Bishop Stortrord, and the Auctioneers, at Royston and Buntingford, where plans of the property may be seen.

This paints a pretty good picture of Higgin’s home and workplace. It also brings William Hinkins back into the picture as he was the current tenant.

Between the 1861 and 1871 census reports note that Hinkins painting business grew. It expanded from employing two men and two boys in 1861 to employing fifteen men and two boys in 1871. This is quite an expansion of staff. His success, however, was very short-lived.

William Hinkins passed away on Sept. 11, 1878. He is buried with his wife and daughter in the Royston Cemetery.

*Gravestone of William Hinkins, Maria Hinkins, and their daughter.*

William’s two sons, William Howard Hinkins and Francis Robert Hinkins, inherited their fathers Plumbers, Painters, and House Decorators business. In 1881, the staff consisted of seven men and two boys. Hinkins legacy continued, as his grandsons also continued the family trade.

The story doesn’t end here, but this is my stopping point.

To be continued…

Tales from a Scenic Artist and Scholar. Part 1131 – Thomas G. Moses in Tacoma, Washington, 1921-1922

In 1921 Thomas G. Moses landed the scenery contract for the Tacoma Scottish Rite. Of the project, he wrote, “It took some work to close the Tacoma job at $6,400.00. Will come back to do the work myself.” He was to start the Tacoma Scottish Rite project at the beginning of December 1921, but he had to put out a few fires before leaving Chicago that winter. Moses wrote, “I should have been back in Tacoma December 1^st. I have written them on the cause of my delay.”

He had a very short period of time to accomplish a lot of tasks in the main studio before leaving town, and there were stops to make along the way. Too much to do in too little time; a theme that I am certainly familiar with these days. Moses and his wife did not leave Chicago until Dec. 13, spending a full day in Kansas City before continuing onto Los Angeles. Then there was another stop in San Francisco, where Moses took the boat across the bay and headed east to Stockton. He hoped to close another contract, but had no such luck.

Of his side trip to Stockton, Moses wrote, “Took the boat back again and left for the north the same day. We had a very pleasant trip. Found a lot of snow in the north on our arrival in Tacoma. We found our apartment all ready for us and it is very cozy.” He was in town to paint scenery for the Scottish Rite Theatre, but also planned on doing a little oil painting in his spare time. Moses, continued, “I found we needed another room for a studio, which I got, and it is going to be a good asset to my picture painting. The most glorious view of the mountain at sunrise, noon, sunset and an hour after sunset. I have finally got to work and while it is going to be a long job, I will enjoy doing it, and incidentally getting some good sketches of the mountain.”

His stay in Tacoma with Ella must have been a wonderful break from both travel and responsibilities associated Sosman & Landis. It was a new project, a new year, and he was surrounded by beautiful scenery. One of his favorite compositions to paint was the nearby Mount Rainier. In 1889, he recorded his first glimpse of the mountain, also known as Mount Shasta, writing, “My first view of Mt. Shasta I shall never forget. It was sunset and all the foreground and middle distance was in shadow. Made a rapid pencil sketch and have since painted it in watercolor and oil, with some success.”

At the onset of 1922, Moses wrote, “January 1^st found the Madam and I enjoying ourselves in Tacoma, Washington. I had the Scottish Rite Temple work pretty well started, went back to the old theatre to work. I was there and painted one of my famous drop curtains.” Moses was referring to the Tacoma Theatre. Moses and Ed Loitz painted the stock scenery for the venue in 1889-1890. Here is the link to my past post about this project: https://drypigment.net2017/09/28/tales-from-a-scenic-artist-and-scholar-acquiring-the-fort-scott-scenery-collection-for-the-minnesota-masonic-heritage-center-part-222-thomas-g-moses-and-the-tacoma-theatre/

Of his drop curtain from 1889, Moses wrote, “As I look at it now, it is hard to realize that I painted it 33 years ago. The scene is in Rome, “Temple of Minerva.” It has a richness of color that we are not able to get now on account of the inferiority quality of the colors. I found my old palette, which gave me a rather uncanny chill, to think that after so many years, it should be waiting for my return.”

*Temple of Minerva Drop Curtain for the Tacoma Theatre, 1889-1890*

The Temple of Minerva was a popular subject for nineteenth-century scene painters. In 1881, an article in “Building News and Engineering Journal,” listed the Temple of Minerva as one of the many compositions painted by scenic artists, showing their versatility of subject matter. The journal’s article was entitled, “Art on The Stage,” and it appeared in the issue on July 29, 1881. Here is an excerpt with the Temple of Minerva mention:

“Scene Painting is an art by itself. There is no other branch of painting just like it, either in the variety of subjects embraced or in the methods employed. The thorough scenic artist must be equally at home in landscape or marine work, architectural or fresco. He is not permitted to cultivate any particular branch of his art, nor any favorite style. He must be able to produce, at any time, the wild mountainous passes of Switzerland or the flat meadows of Holland; the green lanes of homelike England, or the winding valleys of romantic Spain. In his architectural work he cannot devote himself to the Gothic or the Romanesque, but must be equally master of the Moorish, the Greek, and the Oriental. He may to-day be called upon to paint the Temple of Minerva, and to-morrow the Mosque of Omar; this week the Windsor Hotel, and next week the Palace of Versailles. His art knows no boundaries, and his scope is confined by no limits. The universe must be at his command, and things unseen must live in his imagination. The methods by which he works and many of the materials he employs are altogether different from those employed by the ordinary oil or water-colour painter. They approach more nearly to those of the latter, yet even here certain qualities of the colours used by the scene-painter constitute a sharp dividing line.”

Moses’ Temple of Minerva Drop Curtain for the Tacoma Theater was also featured on the front page of “The Palette & Chisel” Club newsletter in 1917. It accompanied and article entitle, “Thomas G. Moses, All Round Scene Painter. His Work is Known from Coast to Coast.”

Here is the introductory paragraph that says so much about his scene painting work:

“Now this article is about an artist whose work has been viewed by more people that ever entered the Art Institute and the Metropolitan Museum since their doors were first opened….probably. And those people paid good round sums to get in where the artist’s work was displayed. You don’t believe that, now do you? Well, then, when I also tell you that this artist painted stage settings for Booth and Barrett, Thomas Keene, McCullough and all that ranting crew of Shakespearian heavies, you will get the pint, of course. And of course, you will think this is just another one of those anniversary obituaries dedicated to some duck that passed out about the time everyone was singing…well, whatever they were singing when real fur bearing men wore flannel night shirts.

Far from that howsumever, the gallant lad immortalized in this rhetorical garland is cheerfully employed just now in packing his sketching trunk for a paint spree in Zion National Park. And incidentally, going and coming he intends to put on the old corduroys with a brace of big theatrical contracts in Salt Lake City and Oakland, California. That is, this venerable old relic will paint the sets himself, and with Uncle Tom that means about ten hours a day on the paint bridge, and ninety days to each job. Isn’t it sad how fragile and inefficient these old timers are becoming! Tom says it bothers him a right smart now to paint a 45×50 drop in one day. What? Hell, no….FEET!”

When the article was written, Moses was sixty-one years old. Four years later in 1921, he was still working at a breakneck speed and tackling entire stock scenery projects.

To be continued…

Tales from a Scenic Artist and Scholar. Part 1111 – “Art vs. Skill,” by Henry C. Tryon, 1883

From 1882 to 1884, Henry C. Tryon (1847-1892) worked and wrote in the Salt Lake City area. As a scenic artist and author, Tryon’s name constantly appeared in the papers. In addition to painting new scenery during the Salt Lake Theatre stage renovation, Tryon also exhibited much of his easel art. He was in the perfect town to market himself. The “Salt Lake Daily Herald” published articles on a variety of artistic activities, including art exhibitions, theatrical productions and other creative ponderings in detail. In some ways this newspaper carried more information about theatrical productions and stage artists than many larger metropolitan publications across the country.

In 1883, an article on art exhibitions noted, “Henry C. Tryon stated when he came here, that he had never seen a range of mountains that afforded better opportunities” (9 Aug 1883, page 8). On May 18, 1883, “The Salt Lake Herald,” reported “Mr. Henry C. Tryon is at work on an oil painting which he has already presented to Mr. H. B. Clawson. It is a landscape in oil and is a gem much to be desired” (page 8). That spring, newspapers also reported, “Speaking of matters of art reminds us that Mr. Henry C. Tryon is still hard at work on scenery for the Salt Lake Theatre…There will not be a foot of old canvas in the building when Tryon leaves for pastures new…We congratulate Mr. Tryon, and are pleased to see the interest he takes in all that he does; and if the work referred to above is not art in its truest sense, then we would be happy to know just what art is” (Salt Lake Daily Herald, 22 April 883, page 12). Tryon was completely a large stock scenery collection, painting fine art pieces for local citizens and taking time to write on a variety of artistic subjects during the first half of 1883.

He submitted several articles to the “Salt Lake Daily Herald” throughout 1883. In his article, “Artistic Flashes,” he ended with the statement, “Don’t falsify nature by attempting, with your petty vanity, to improve upon her work. You will fail, because nature as an artist is pre-eminently superior to you” (9 Feb 1883, page 3).

On Sunday, August 12, 1883, he elaborated on this sentiment in Tryon’s “Art vs Skill.” Here is the article in its entirety:

ART vs. SKILL

By HENRY C. TRYON

There is a story familiar to most people of two rival artists, whose relative merits were disputed by their several admirers. To settle the dispute, they engaged in a friendly contest. On painted some fruit and put it in the window. It was so skillfully executed that the birds tried to get at this fruit. The other then had his picture ready and draped. His rival, attempting to raise the curtain that covered the supposed picture, learned that it was a clever deception being a skillfully painted representation of a cloth. The first artist exclaimed enthusiastically, “You are the greater artist: for, while I deceived only the birds, you have deceived an artist.”

This story, like most of those written about artists, is the verist nonsense. Two artists are not likely to enter into a “go-as-you-please” contest, nor to put on gloves to try which is the better man for a prize medal and the applause of the public. That always has been left to public performers and to mountebanks. By assuming the story to be true, it is no proof that either of them was an artist in a real sense. It proves nothing whatever. The popular idea of art is that skill, imitation, projection and perspective are the ends of all efforts in art; and that a work of art practically is to be judges by the skill shown in these directions, with a kind of vague idea that sentiment of color, tone, harmony, force, tenderness and feeling are but a means intended for the connoisseur to “ring them in,” – as one would pretty talk, which may be thrown in indiscriminately.

An artist, for instance, paints a street scene. It matters not how inartistic and mechanical the scene may be, nor how harsh and crude may be the color, if the perspective and light and shadow be correct, the average observer will look upon the scene as a marvelous work, for ‘It appears to reach back for a mile,’ and his surprise and wonder at this success overcomes any other feeling. This misunderstanding of the aim and object of true art prevents him from being even critical or even interested in anything beyond. Yet all this is a mechanical success, pure and simple. That linear perspective has no art quality of itself, and is not even difficult of attainment, all artists know who know anything about it. It is the same with projection. Draw an object and cast shadow from it, and it will apparently project from the paper. Anybody can do it. So, with imitation.

Every portrait painter knows the necessity of not painting laces or jewels or other flippant accessories with too much realism, else the general observer (who imagines imitation to be the greatest achievement) will never see the face at all. A certain eminent artist in painting a subject introduced in the picture a mat. After the attention of a few people had been fastened on that mat and they had analyzed its material, texture, and probably cost per yard, in disgust he painted it over, so that nobody afterward would think of it except that it was a mat, and pass on to the real picture – the material which made up the sentiment and the story he desired to express. Suppose a person in describing in writing the wonderful grandeur and beauty of the Wasatch range, should pause lovingly in the description of some pig pen, making this description so vivid and realistic that the total impression remained with the reader that it was a picture of a pig pen with an accessory of Wasatch mountains. What would the reader think? (assuming the purpose of this piece of literature was to convey a sentiment of the grandeur of the mountains) It is exactly so with art; mere imitation requires nothing but a little knowledge, more practice, and more or less patience; but these qualities alone do not make an artist; they simply enable an artist to express art feeling. The mere mechanical ability to touch the right keys on a piano in the translation of a musical composition, does not make a musician. It merely enables one to express musical thought and feeling, if he has it; and if he has it not, he is recognized by musicians as a musical artist, but is considered a musical mechanic. We all understand what is meant by “machine poetry.” The rhyme and the metre maybe faultless, but if it contains no grand beautiful or ennobling thought, it is recognized by all as mere verse; and there is all the difference in the world between verse and poetry. Literature and the arts are precisely similar in their objects. The poet paints with language, the musician with harmonies, the sculptor and draughtsman forms. The arts are so intimately blended that the mechanical phrases even are the same throughout. Who does not feel what is meant by color as applied to musical composition, and tenderness, strength, feeling and harmony as applied to painting? Follow the terms used in all the aria and they can be applied indiscriminately to each. Art is poetry, or it is nothing. If a picture, painted never so skillfully has nothing in it except the skill and knowledge of the artist, and does not contain poetic feeling, or is in any purpose or poetic cause why should it be painted, it ranks as a work of art, no higher than a piece of literature produced for the sole object of showing the author’s knowledge of words and of the grammatical arrangement of them.

A picture should be painted to express some of the sentiment (and assuming that that has been successfully accomplished) the nobility, purity and beauty of that sentiment will determine the position of the picture as a work of art. What is generally considered to be the end of art is properly the means to an end; the real end depends upon the genius of the artist. It is always conceded that an artist thoroughly understands the mechanical means to art (before mentioned), just as it is presupposed that an author understands grammatical rules and the skillful construction of sentences. When each is thus equipped, then he has within his grasp all that is required to give expression to high thoughts and sublime images; but unless the genius – the spirit of poetry – is inherent, he can only give to the world that which time, patience and perseverance will do for any intelligent person.”

*Detail of brushed used for scenic art.*

To be continued…

Tales from a Scenic Artist and Scholar. Part 1104 – Henry C. Tryon, Thomas G. Moses and John H. Young in West Virginia, 1885

In 1884, Henry C. Tryon joined the Sosman & Landis studio staff in Chicago as replacement for Lemuel L. Graham. “Lem” had left for Kansas City to open a regional branch there. At the time, John H. Young was also working for Sosman & Landis, but primarily painting at the firm’s New York studio.

*Henry C. Tryon pictured in the “Inter Ocean,” Feb. 28, 1886, page 9.*

*John H. Young pictured in the “Inter Ocean,” Feb. 28, 1886, page 9.*

*Thomas G. Moses pictured in the “Inter Ocean,” Feb. 28, 1886, page 9.*

Of Tryon’s arrival at Sosman & Landis, Moses wrote, “he enthused Young and I more than anyone ever had. He was a pupil of Thos. Moran and James and William Hart and was very clever, but awfully eccentric.”

In October 1885, Moses, Young and Tryon journeyed to West Virginia on a sketching trip. The full story was published in the “Palette & Chisel Club” newsletter years later. Today’s post is a series of excerpts about Tryon from Moses’ story. It provides ten sort scenes that give us a glimpse into Tryon’s personality on the sketching trip:

1. Moses wrote, “I certainly enjoyed talking on any subject with Tryon. He was very strong on politics, which did not particularly interest me. He was very interesting when it came to anything on art. He had been a pupil of Thomas Moran. Tryon told this story: He had bothered Moran for some time trying to induce Moran to take him on as a pupil. Moran was too much of a gentleman to throw Tryon out of his studio, so he finally took an old canvas, slapped on a lot of color with a palette knife, handed it to Tryon and said: “Take home that, make a picture out of the accidentals and bring it back in a week.” Moran felt that Tryon would throw the canvas away and not come back. The week-end found Tryon back and Moran was so well pleased with the result that he took Tryon in as a pupil, which was very beneficial to Tryon who followed Moran’s style of work even into his scenic painting, as well as his oil. He enjoyed telling this story; he surely must have made a good picture of Moran’s accidentals.”

2. Moses wrote, “We went through a number of tunnels and one, which was over a mile in length, was at a town called Tunneltown. We were now in West Virginia, on the Cheat River. The color was wonderful; the extreme blue of the distant mountains gave the whole landscape a most brilliant opalescent effect. Tryon was simply wild with joy, jumping from one side of the car to the other and calling me “There look a that, isn’t it wonderful! Aren’t you glad that you came? Did you ever see such color”? We both felt like jumping off; at every turn we could see a picture. As we neared Piedmont, West Virginia, the scenery became wilder and more colorful.”

3. Moses wrote, “While we were waiting for our dinner, and were all seated on the big porch, Tryon was seized with stomach cramps. Mr. Elkins noticed Tryon’s groaning and said, “Mr. Tryon, if you will go up to Room 3 you will find a black grip; open it and right on top you will find a cure for stomach trouble.” Tryon did this and came down feeling better, thanked Mr. Elkins, and within fifteen minutes had another cramp. Mr. Elkins said, “Go after it again, Tryon,” and he did. This time he must have taken a good long one, for it seemed to settle him.”

4. Moses wrote, “The General Store at Schell was some store and included the post office. Back of that was the living-room and kitchen and there were three rooms upstairs. Tryon and I occupied one of these. John Young joined us here and entered into the spirit of the outing. The evening of Young’s arrival we were all in the store. Young was stretched out on the counter, with his head resting in the scoop of the scales, and Tryon, with his immense meerschaum, was hitting it up like an engine. We missed the talkative huntsman, but everyone here was interested in us and our work because Mr. Elkins had told them who we were. We had two beds in our room, but had to pass through a room occupied by the landlord’s son. If he happened to be awake when we retired, Tryon would always stop and talk with him. The landlord was an infidel, which pleased Tryon, for it gave him the opportunity to assist in tearing all of the religions of the world into shreds. In one way, Tryon did not believe all he said. I believe he only wanted a chance to argue.”

5. Moses wrote, “The eccentric antics of Tryon seemed to amuse the natives. He very seldom had breakfast with Young and me; we would usually be out sketching an hour before he showed up. We found one fine place not more than a quarter of a mile from the store, across the river, which, at this point, was very narrow and awfully swift. We had a small boat which we used in crossing this turbulent stream, and we had to be very careful to avoid being dashed to pieces against the big rocks. By going upstream some distance we could ford across, and Young, with his long legs could jump across from rock to rock, but he preferred the boat. On the other side we found all kinds of sketches.”

6. Moses wrote, “During the night a heavy thunderstorm passed over us, and the wind through the big pine and hemlock trees, together with the constant baying of the hounds, made the night one of unpleasant dreams. Tryon and I had a double room. As he was very careless with his clothes – the floor was better than a chair – he stepped on his derby hat. A fine kind of hat to take on a sketching trip! Strips of paper glued to the inside of it put it in good working shape again.”

7. Moses wrote, “On a trip to Blackwater Falls we experienced a hard battle to get through the laurel, not so much ourselves as the unwieldy stools, easels and paint boxes, which managed to get caught at every other step, sorely impeding our progress. On reaching the brink of the Falls we discovered a very precipitous bank, impossible of descent. We made a couple of sketches up the river from the brink, then tried to figure out some way to get below, for that was the sketch we wanted. Tryon was not quite through with his sketch, but agreed to follow us, so Young and I forged ahead down the river, trying to find a place to crawl down. We went fully a mile before we found an opening; then the walk back to the falls was pretty hard – mostly over rocks in midstream, which was madly rushing over and around them. It was hard to keep our feet from slipping on the wet stones. On reaching the bottom of the Falls we were surprised to find Tryon calmly sketching and smoking his big pipe and quietly giving us the merry “Ha! Ha!” We were quite anxious to know how he did it. He explained that he had come down on a big pine tree which grew within three feet of the bank and was fully sixty feet high. He had dropped his stool and easel before going down himself. For a wonder, nothing was broken; they just happened to fall on a lot of moss and leaves. One look at his clothes, face and hands proved that he had paid the price, but he did not mind that. The pleasure of beating his two young students (as he always called us) was all he cared for. The effort of getting down and back was offset by the good sketches we had made. On returning we asked Tryon why he did not return the same way he had dropped into the pocket. He looked at the big tree, shook his head – then went back with us.”

8. Moses wrote, “Another long tramp into the wilderness brought us to the head of the north branch of the Potomac, a spring as little known as the source of the River Nile. We tramped through jungles. Forded streams and climbed precipices until I gave out and had to rest and take the good-natured jibes of Tryon and Young. After a good rest, in which my tramping friends participated, we pushed onto the Potomac. It is a narrow powerful stream; a number of cataracts, in a series of eleven bold leaps, are a shining flood down the mountain side; gloomy chasms open from either side, dense, dark laurel thickets choke every approach, but through all the vigorous, bright stream leaps and shouts with a mad joy as it forces, its way on to the ocean. In the early spring this stream must be very powerful as is indicates by the amount of good-sized logs and debris of all kinds piled up on the banks, at present out of reach of the water which, at this season of year, is clear and cold.”

9. Moses wrote, “When we three were working together there was a constant stream of talk, not always about art. Tryon was very fond of an argument. One instance: In painting a rock in the water, the wet part of the rock, being so much darker, forms a sharp line on the top of the water. Young and I had always painted a light line – Tryon proved to us that the line was dark and water threw a shadow on the rock. He would lie on his back for hours studying the light coming through the eaves of a red maple. At that time of year the color was fine. He succeeded in making a very effective sketch; the undertone was fine and the cool, grey lights were very effective.”

10. Moses wrote, “At this time, Tryon was very much in love with a schoolteacher in Haverhill, Massachusetts, whose name was Hattie. He promised to write her every day and she had promised to reciprocate. So we spent the evening writing letters to our dear ones.”

Tryon’s relationship with Hattie was announced earlier that summer in the “Salt Lake Herald.” On June 18, 1884, the newspaper reported, “Henry C. Tryon, the scenic artist, wrote from Haverhill, Mass., that he is about to perpetuate matrimony, and he sends a photo of the beautiful lady whom he designates as the victim. In gazing at the picture and thinking of Henry, we wonder how he was able to “work the act” (page 8).

To be continued…

Tales from a Scenic Artist and Scholar. Part 1090 – “SCENE-PAINTING. An Art Which Has Been Neglected and Allowed to Retrograde in Chicago,” by Henry C. Tryon, 1884

For the past few days I have been sharing some articles pens by Henry C. Tryon in the 1880s. Simultaneously, I am writing about the life and career of Tryon’s one-time partner, Henry E. Burcky as part of “Travels of a Scenic Artist and Scholar” after identifying Burcky’s scenic art for the Tabor Opera House in Leadville, Colorado.

In 1884 Tryon returned to Chicago, accepting a position at Sosman & Landis scene painting studios. Previously, he had worked as the scenic artist for both the Tabor Grand Opera House in Denver and the Salt Lake City Theatre in Utah.

*Clipping of Henry C. Tryon pasted in the* *scrapbook of Thomas G. Moses.*

On Dec. 28, 1884, “Chicago Tribune” published an article submitted by Tryon about the scenic art industry (Chicago, Illinois, 28 Dec 1884, page 14). The headline reads, “SCENE-PAINTING. An Art Which Has Been Neglected and Allowed to Retrograde in Chicago.” The next two subheadings of the article state, “An Important Accessory of the Theatre Which Managers and Public Alike Disregard. Turning Out So-Called Art Work by Wholesale – Culture in Europe and America.” This is possibly the most insightful article that I have located to date, written by someone who was a Sosman & Landis employee. Tryon not only tales aim at scenic studios, but also examines the root of many problems in the industry.

Although it is quite long, this 1884 article is well worth reading. Here’s Tryon’s article in its entirety:

“Are audiences when viewing a stage picture, distant 100 feet or so from their seats, aware of the immense difficulties under which the artist labored when painting it? Are they aware that he was compelled to stand within three or at most four feet from his canvas and unable to see more than a few square yards at a time? Do they realize the accurate knowledge of drawing, composition, perspective, and color required to enable hi under such circumstances to produce and effect which will be realism to them? The artist must carry in his mind’s eye the completed scene as it will appear from the auditorium, and make no error in the relative proportions and harmonies of the different piece which compose the set and which are placed on his frame one or two at a time to be painted. The theatrical and artistic character of theatres is especially governed by the stage appointments, Beauty of scenery is the most interesting and attractive kind of theatrical decoration.

No richness of auditorium will compensate for its absence.

The qualities required of a first-class scenic artist are of a much higher order than is generally supposed, and many technical difficulties are to be overcome before he can produce any brilliant effect whatsoever. One of the chief difficulties arises from the fact that his colors “dry out” several shades lighter than when they are applied. (Moisten a piece of wall paper in a room and the difference in color will illustrate this difficulty.) The artist is compelled to paint with one color while thinking of another.

Then the effect of a night light is a serious drawback. Everybody must have noticed that some colors are heightened, and others dimmed be being brought under the yellow gaslight. The scene-painter working in the broad glare of day must consider with every mark he makes the effect of this gaslight on his color. A brilliant effect by daylight may under an artificial light be entirely destroyed, and also the reverse is true; but the scene-painter must not depend upon accident in the matter.

DEAD COLORS.

Stage scenery and drop curtains are never painted in oil colors. As the effect of realism is to be attained, all glare must be avoided. The artist is limited to the use of dead color and must get his brilliant effects by skillful harmonies and combination.

Scenery then, being painted with water colors, the danger from fire is much less than s popularly supposed. The canvas is much less combustible than it was before being painted. Scene painted on both sides are almost fireproof.

The scene-painter seldom has leisure to do work at his best, and has neither time nor opportunity to correct his errors. When a picture is painted in an artist’s studio, before being finally finished and exhibited the artist will see where a change here and there will enhance the value of his painting, and he can perfect it. The scene=painter is (of necessity) denied this advantage, and his first chance to even see his completed work properly set and lighted is when he is one of the audience.

The result of seeing his work as he proceeds with the eyes of the audience is that, as he acquires knowledge, experience, and consequent skill, he gradually gets to using larger brushes, so that he is enabled, with the roughest and apparently most reckless “swashes” of the calcimining brush, to produce effects as soft, tender, and full of appropriate meaning as is done on smaller surfaces by many landscape painters.

The popular impression is that because scenes are thus painted with broad, bold, rough marks it is scarcely more than a grade or so advanced beyond mechanical work; but really it is this which makes it indisputably art and not mechanical skill.

In scene painting as in any other art, it is only the novice who takes the life out of his work by petty, contemptible smoothing down with small brushes. “Picture are made to be seen, not smelled,” said Reynolds. In decorative painting mechanical finish is the important requisite, but in scene painting this is no more an excellence than is mechanical finish in any other art.

METHODS.

The “modus operandi” of designing, painting, and arranging a set of scenery for the stage is about as follows: A descriptive “scene plot” is sent to the artist, locating the position of such portions of the scene as will be necessary to or in harmony with the “business” of the play and of the dramatic people. This plot also states the piece and period for which the scene is to be painted. The artist is not aided in his composition by the plot, but he is limited by it, the scenery, of course, being an accessory to the play and the acting. The “scene-plots” being in the artist’s hands he proceeds to study out the entire picture as it will appear when set before the audience, making a rough charcoal drawing as he thinks and composes. When his ideas have been condensed into form, he makes a cardboard model to a scale of such pieces as are required, ending his work with the “set pieces,” which were made while his work was progressing on the large canvases. His assistants having “primed” the canvas with a coating of “size” water and glue, and this being dry, he sketches in his work roughly with charcoal in a large porte crayon fastened to a large bamboo fish-pole. Having satisfactorily located the leading lines of his drawing, he corrects and gives it character with ink-marks, using a small brush. (These ink-marks will show though his color just enough so that he will not lose his drawing.” He is now ready to paint. His colors are in water pails and in paint-pots, besides which he has a palet board – a table on wheels – about eight or nine feet long and three feet wide, painted with white oil-color, and the surface polished like glass. Along one side of this palet are boxes about five inches wide for different crude colors as they come from the store. With the colors already mixed and varied by such as he wishes to get from the palet he lays in the general tone and color of his scene. This dries almost as fast as he applies it – if the weather be not too cold or damp – so that he can soon, by the assertion of culminating lights and shadows, give character to his work (before somewhat chaotic), and also make his effects of color more brilliant and his pictures more spirited.

The different portions which make up the scene having been made and painted, they are the night of the performance set on the stage and the gaslights arranged under the direction of the artist, and this arrangement is carried out thereafter by the stage carpenter under the direction of the stage manager. This is the way it is done in such theatres as the Union Square, Wallack’s, and Daly’s in New York, and the Boston Museum and Boston Theatre.

In Chicago, of the painter’s work be well done, the management is praised and artist’s individually overlooked, just as if the keeper of a picture gallery were given credit for the canvases displayed.

PICTURES.

The means employed by the masters in landscape-painting are similar to those of the best scene-painters, and it is only great artists – picture-painters are here spoken of – whose technique bears a resemblance to scene-painting. The nearer a theatrical scene is like a correct and beautiful picture the more artistic and meritorious is the scene. Much of the knowledge that scene-painters lack could be supplied them by studio artists, and studio artists could obtain from scene-painters knowledge of means to improve their own “technique” that of the best scene-painting being the best possible for their own pictures.

With their ideality in composition and boldness and facility in execution and expression, the scenic artist needs only closer study of the outdoor nature to enable him to fully demonstrate his ability to successfully compete in all respects on his immense surface, with the productions of our best landscape artists on their smaller canvases.

The method used in Continental Europe of this making up a scene with arches,” “drops” and “set pieces” is one important cause of the nobility and beauty of the spectacular scenes which have been imported here from time to time. These effects of grandeur-produced by means the most simple and natural 0 have also been shown at the operatic and dramatic festivals in Cincinnati by American artists.

In an artistic sense “flats” which run in grooved across the stage are an abomination. They require an immense width of stage to run in, and narrow the scenery to small dimensions. For instance, in one of the theatre here the “flats” are twenty feet high and twenty-eight feet wide, while the “drops” are thirty feet high and fifty feet wide, so that the full width of the stage and the height of proscenium opening are only shown when the continental method is used. Even in interior sets the apparent height of rooms would not be too great when painted on a large drop if as much stage space as necessary were taken up with the ceiling in perspective, as is done in Europe. We already use their method of elaborate exteriors. The society drama is responsible for the continuance in theatres of “flats,” and the increased height to “rigging loft” or ceiling in modern theatres makes the further use of “flats” unnecessary. It will certainly be eventually abandoned if the influence of scenic artists prevails.

FOREIGN NOTES.

In Europe each scene-painter studies and practices exclusively certain branches in his art and is not required or expected to do any scenic work outside of the field which he has made his special study. One artist there paints landscapes, foliage and exteriors; another architecture, figures and drapery, and so on. In Paris, certain artists are exclusively engaged in designing “models” of scenes which other artists paint. The perfection which these artists reach is wonderful, and this, with the care and deliberate thought which they are allowed to give to a scenic production. Is, of course, followed by grand results. In America each scene-painter is expected to excel in all these specialties.

In New York here, four, or six artists are engaged on the scenery for one play, and each painter has his own scene, for which he has to receive praise or blame.

In Chicago one scene painter is required to paint all the scenery for a play in less than a week, and when he has longer time the amount of work called for is so much greater proportionately that he must force himself to do it with too great speed and with too little thought to do him justice and his ability anything like justice.

The discerning public of Chicago perceive the scenery is not prepared for them with the same care and elaboration that they were accustomed to see exhibited in theatres a few years ago. They feel that something is amiss, but wat it is they can only surmise.

LOCAL DRAWBACKS.

The obstacles to adequate scenic mounting of plays here are numerous, but none of them are insurmountable. The “run” of pieces is brief, managers of combinations are negligent about sending their scene plots in time for proper preparation, and sharing terms will not always justify the local manager in incurring expense, experience having taught him that there is not sufficient additional patronage to repay him. The attention of the public is entirely engrossed by the dramatic features, so that very little attention is directed to the scenery. The management is not criticized by the press for lack of care in this direction, except spasmodically, and consequently the public, who are influenced by the press, take less notice of scenery here than they do in some other cities, notably the East, and in San Francisco, where the scenic artist upon producing genuine art work finds it recognized by the public and his individuality as fully stablished as is that if a favorite actor, The careful and excellent system of stage management of leading Eastern theatres is not exercised here, all attention being given to the auditorium end to the business policy of the house. Theatres here do not have stage managers, and although the artist – theoretically – has absolute control of every feature that has an influence on his scene, practically the stage-carpenters, property-men and managers of combination set things according to their own ideas. The artist is rarely consulted in the matter. His opinions of the fitness and harmony of things from an artistic standpoint are too esthetic for the practical (?) ideas of those who have the handling of productions.

These scenery for the regular theatres is constantly being changed, and much of the work done is only retained during the run of the play for which it was painted, but in the provincial towns, where no artist is regularly employed, the house being once “stocked,” the same scenery is seen over and over again by the audience for six or eight years, until they grow weary of even artistic work long before it is worn out, and scenery which is cheap becomes absolutely disgusting even to those unlearned in art.

Cheap art is valueless, but is in altogether too great demand in the provincial cities in this country. One man is not as good as another in science, literature or art. A picture by Meisonnier will sell for $50,000. Because John Smith or Peter Jones paints a similar subject and use as much or more paints, it is not considered a logical reason why the works of Smith or Jones are equal to those of Meissonnier. This is self-evident, and a little thought would make it self-evident that the same idea applies as well to scene painters.

SCENE FACTORIES.

It is known to those interested in such matters that an opera-house or a public hall is being erected, and at the proper time applications are made for the contract for furnishing the scenery. Competent scenic artists are too modest and reticent in speaking of their abilities, while competing for “outside” work. The greater their abilities and reputations as artists the less are their chances of success, outside of the regular theatres. They erroneously suppose that an engagement in a first-class theatre is sufficient evidence of their capabilities, but this goes for little with nontheatrical people who construct theatres. With them the cheapest man or the shrewdest businessman has the best chance.

Artists rarely possess business talent, but it would seem that a business man engaging one would understand that it is art ability he should employ to do art work.

The agent of a scene-factory makes his bid and his figures are so much lower than those of the capable artist that he usually secures the contract, The competing artists have based their bids in their intentions of producing genuine art work, while the successful bidder has no such idea.

The proprietors of the “factory” known nothing about art and care less. They know nothing about the requirements of a theatre, as they have never had any experience in one. They, however, succeed in obtaining the contract, and the agent having taken the various measurements, goes back to the factory, where the work is all done, to have the stuff rushed out as fast as possible.

Yet these establishments employ some really capable artists, who hate their work and despise themselves for being compelled to do it. The methods are such as effectually to crush out all their art feelings, and they themselves have nicknamed the place in which they work, “the slaughterhouse.” All these methods are ruinous to a noble art.

Scenery should always be painted in the theatre in which it is used. The conditions vary so much in different houses than an intelligent knowledge of them should be ever present in the mind of the artist who is engaged upon the scenery for each. The proprietor should select an artist who is known to be competent by theatre men, one whom they themselves would employ. He should be paid enough money to warrant him cheerfully giving all the time and thought necessary to produce the best work in his power, and after having made his contract he will forget all other interests except his purely artistic ones. This will advance him as an artist. He has a reputation to gain or lose; his pride is stimulated to the advantage of his employer, and the results are sure to be bountiful in satisfaction to both parties, and consequently to the advantage of the community.

These factories are not recognized in any way by Chicago managers, but so successful have they been in driving legitimate scenic artists from the provincial field that their owners openly boast that in a few years they will be supplying all the scenic requirements to our city theatres. How do the play-going public like the prospect?

The solution of the question, “How can scenery be produced as elegantly here as possible with the means available?” sums itself up simply in the employ of more artists, absolute authority of those artists in their own domain, with the burden of responsibility attached, greater expenditure of money by the managers for material to paint on, and careful, critical, and discriminating notice in detail by the public press.

PROGRESS OF CULTURE.

The advance of ideas among scene-painters in this country has kept pace with the general advance in art. What would have been regarded as “high art” a generation ago would hardly be tolerated now. Scene-painting is now studied, thought of, and handled as an art. All good artists have their distinct characteristics, each painting according to his individual nature and feeling.

The advance of steel-engraving in America far beyond that reached in Europe was the result of the demand for it, caused by the multiplicity of the “wildcat” banks and stock enterprises. The absorbing interest of the whole people in pictorial reproductions of incidents of the War was probably the main cause of the advance in wood-engraving, which has also reached its highest production here. Theatrical posters and lithographs are now works of art, as are also the labels upon the wares of merchants. Demands upon art ability have always been fully supplied by the talent of Americans. Business houses, banks, and public buildings are now expensively and tastefully decorated. The general art education has advanced and is still advancing with strides. Auditoriums of theatres are elegantly and artistically decorated. One step remains – the only one. The public will demand, recognize, and appreciate the highest art excellence behind the prosceniums of the theatres. Managers and artists must then do their best, and the result will be increased attraction of the theatres and an influence from them which will elevate the general tone.

-Henry C. Tryon”

To be continued…

Tales from a Scenic Artist and Scholar. Part 877 – “The Truth About the Painting Business,” 1913

The same year that Walter W. Burridge passed away, an interesting article was written about the demise of the decorative painting business. Many scenic artists and studios relied on decorative painting work. Ornate auditoriums and picturesque murals were often the work of the same artists who delivered the stock scenery and stage machinery. However, the world of painting and its place in the theatre industry was changing.

“The Truth About the Painting Business,” was included in “The Road to Success,” was a publication by the Charles Kraut Academy of Decorative Art in Chicago. Here is an the article that especially resonates with the state of scenic art today:

“The Truth About the Painting Business.

Of great importance to every man interested in the Painting and Decorating Business, be he Master or Workingman.

READ CAREFULLY AND EVERY LINE OF IT.

The Painting business in the United States and Canada has been on the downward grade for a number of years. Every painter knows this and has wondered why it is that the Painter is classed now with the unskilled laborer, where in fact he ought to be considered a high grade and skillful mechanic.

The reason is that the great majority of the Master Painters, as well as the Painter in general, have neglected to go with the times. The majority are satisfied with the “unskilled labor” part of the business. They are satisfied if they can even make a few dollars out of a job, which they got away, perhaps through unfair competition, from the other fellow, where by rights he ought to make good money and have twice the amount of work on the same job. Now-a-days a painter, if he thinks at all, thinks and tries to invent new mixtures to skin the work still more to beat his competitor, while by rights he ought to strive and learn something that the other fellow does not know and start in on a competition of skill, and persuade to House owners to have rooms decorated in refined taste. This will give him more work to do on individual jobs, he will be able to employ the working men longer, he will get more money for the job, he will be recognized as an artist and he will get more satisfaction and pleasure out of the work.

Now comes the objection that every painter springs on me, and that is: The public in general does not know anything about Art, the people are not educated in this direction and are well pleased with “wall paper” which is cheaper. I admit that this is true, but who’s fault is it tat the public is ignorant of Art, and especially Decorative Art?

“It is the duty of the Painter to educate the general public. The general public is willing, even anxious, to be educated in this line, every house owner, or the lady of every household will gladly listed to a painter in the direction, providing the painter knows what he is talking about and has a reputation in this direction; and as it stands now, there is only about one Painter in every hundred who can carry on a conversation of this sort which he will convenience the head of the household that he is able to carry out what he proposes. It is a wonder that people prefer to have their homes tinted in plain colors or are satisfied with wall paper? Is it a wonder that they do not ask the painter to think up some decorative scheme for their rooms? They do not trust the man, because he does not make the suggestion himself, and consequently class him with the unskilled laborer.

In Europe, the general public is educated in this direction, and no flat, no matter how small, is without some decoration, free-hand work, while all the Residences, Churches, Theatres, etc. are elaborately decorated. Well, who would educate the people in Europe? Do you suppose this line is taught in the public schools? No, the Painter did this; in Europe competition in skill is considered first and above the competition twice

[Me: Re-read the last line, as this was the case in American until a notable shift occurred during the 1890s].

Is it not high time that something is done to regain the prestige of the Painter in this Country and to get more and better work at higher profits?

This can only be done by first educating the individual Master Painter and workingman, and he in turn is bound to educate the general public. It is high time that a move in this direction should be taken. Every Master Painter and Painter has the opportunity now to educate himself and at very little expense. Of course he can not learn in a month or one year everything which a practical Decorator must know, but he can gradually educate himself by practicing during his spare hours at home, an opportunity that is not given the painter in Europe.

A man who can afford to practices and study for about three months at a stretch every year (during Winter) will do wonders in that line. A man can become a skilled and high grade mechanic only be devoting his spare tie to study and practice for a year or two, and if he makes up his mind to succeed, he cannot fail, if he practices as much as is necessary, and he will never regret having taken the trouble.

At every Convention of Master Painters and Painters so far, it has always been emphasized that it is necessary to educate the Painter in the business,-the school question has always been a leading item, If the Master Painters and Painters will only co-operate in the direction laid down by me, a revolution in our profession is sure to come. Educate yourself, tell your men to acquire and education in the business and to become Decorators, and the education of the public is bound to follow.

Do not be afraid of over-production in this line. Only the narrow man will think it. There is no over-production in Europe, although schools have been turning out Decorators for over 100 years, and the schools are still growing. The more Decorators there are, the more the general public will become educated in this line. Within a short time competition in skill will take place in the painting and decorating business in this Country, and the man not educated in this line will have to be satisfied to be known and classed with the laborer, while the other man who gets an education in the decorating business will have the opportunity and ability to complete with the man who is taking the extra cream of the work now, and by that competition in skill will ensue. Your old customers will certainly have more respect for you, if you can prove that you are able to execute artistic work.

It is high time that a move in this direction should be started, because the most beautiful of all styles in decorative work is coming to us now. This is the “Up-to-date Conception of the Italian Renaissance,” a style in which very elaborate Ornaments, Flowers and Figures are employed, To be able to do this kind of work, a schooling is absolutely necessary, as the work is all frees-hand, and stencils will not be used, You can watch this style breaking through everywhere. Look at the new Furniture, Frames, or Wood-work (trim) of high grade work, go to the leading Hotels and look at the Banquet Halls and Lobbies which have been decorated recently, and you will see the new direction, Within two of three years it will be in full swing, and you ought to prepare yourself and also tell your men to prepare themselves to be able to meet the demand when it comes.”

But a world war was just waiting around the corner, and the education that he spoke of took a different turn. This sets the groundwork for Thomas G. Moses 1914 entry in August.

To be continued…

Example of decorative painting at Schloss Rosenau in Austria.

Above the curved staircase. Example of decorative painting at Schloss Rosenau in Austria.

The curved staircase. Example of decorative painting at Schloss Rosenau in Austria.

Here are a few examples of decorative painting at Schloss Rosenau in Austria. Here is one of many links about this interesting building: https://www.inspirock.com/austria/schloss-rosenau/osterreichisches-freimaurermuseum-im-schloss-rosenau-a1254825113

Tales from a Scenic Artist and Scholar. Part 790 – The Costly Drop Curtain by Jean Louis Ernest Meissonier, 1911.

On January 25, 1911, an entertaining article was published in “The Columbus Journal” about a fine artist’s quote to paint a drop curtain.

Here is the article in its entirety:

“Costly Drop Curtain.

The One Meissonier Didn’t Paint For French Theatre.

The enterprising manager of a theater called upon the famous French artist Jean Louis Ernest Meissonier on one occasion and asked him to paint a drop scene for a certain theater and name his terms.

‘You have seen my pictures, then?’ asked Meissonier.

‘Oh, yes,’ exclaimed the manager, ‘but it is your name I want! It will draw crowds to my theater.’

‘And how large do your wish the curtain to be’ inquired the artist.

‘Ah, well, we will say 15 by 18 meters.’

Meissonier took up a pen and pencil and proceeded to make a calculation. At last he looked up and said, with imperturbable gravity,

‘I calculated and find that my pictures are valued at 80,000 francs per meter. Your curtain, therefore, will cost you just 21,600,000 francs. But that is not all. It takes me twelve months to paint twenty-five centimeters of canvas. It will take me just 190 years to finish your curtain. You should have come to me earlier, monsieur. I am too old for undertaking it now. God morning.”

Meissonier (1815-1891) was a sculptor and fine artist, known for his detail and precise brushwork. His realistic approach to painting meant that it took time to complete each composition; the same techniques could not be applied to the stage for many reasons.

Although Meissonier passed away two decades before the 1911 article was published, the story still resonates in the field of scenic art today. The precision required for photorealistic painting takes more time, and ultimately, these same techniques destroy illusion on the stage. An artist may excel at photorealism yet remain unable to produce a satisfactory backdrop or large outdoor mural.

Many artists struggle when they change exhibition spaces, for example, transitioning from small-scale watercolors to large-scale theatrical backdrops. Painting miniatures for an art gallery versus painting cycloramas for the stage require different techniques, tools and materials. Is the artwork intended to be viewed from several inches away or from several yards away? An automated billboard in Times Square is intended to be viewed from several blocks away. The basis of scenic art has always been learning how to see from the audience’s perspective. This skill is not necessarily taught in fine art schools.

Different painting techniques take an artist different amounts of time to complete. This is what is addressed in the 1911 newspaper article above. Meissonier based his estimate on a very realistic technique, one that he used for his many detailed military compositions. Painting techniques not only shift when transitioning from one type of artwork to another, but also one school of scenic art to another. Some techniques take more time. Here is one example: The majority of theatrical backdrops created at the turn of the twentieth century took between one and two days. The same compositions might now take a scenic artist one to two weeks to complete. It is not that contemporary scenic artists are untalented, or simply slow. Much has to do with the fact that many of the scenic art techniques have been lost or altered over the decades, whether intentional or not. In addition to the shift in painting techniques, the overall paint system changed from dry pigment to pre-mixed theatrical paints. Shifts in scenic art remain dependent on instruction, tools, and type of paint. Whether a student learns in a classroom or scene shop, the instructor/journeyman is the one to pass along a tradition and “preferred” type of painting system.

Dry pigment paint table used by Jesse Cox on display at the Mt. Pleasant Theatre Museum in Iowa

In the past, I have posted articles that examined why scenic artists more easily transitioned to a fine art gallery than fine artists transitioned to the stage. It all has to do with one’s ability to understand how painted compositions are intended to be viewed from any distance, whether far away or close up. In short, theatrical artists painted many compositions that were intended to be viewed from a distance of twenty feet or more, employing speed and economical brushwork. They incorporated specific painting techniques that allowed the audience’s “eye” to fill in the gaps. There needs to be a division of colors and separate of value. Keep in mind their work appeared at many other venues beyond the theatre, opera, and vaudeville stage. Scenic artists controlled the scenic illusion at world fair attractions, grand circus spectacles, and American pageants. The scenic artist could not create photographic realism for these venues as their paintings would appear fuzzy from a distance.

At the same time, these same scenic artists had to paint for intimate performance spaces and displays that placed audience members mere feet from their work. This requires an overall understanding of stage illusion and various scenic art techniques for any venue, in addition to basic artistic training in color, light, perspective, composition and layout. In the end, these trained, experienced and knowledgeable individuals understood how to make their artworks come to life from a distance or up close. Painting techniques placed well upstage of the proscenium line would “fall apart” when examined close-up. The same could not be said for a drop curtain that was within almost arms reach of the first row, as the techniques were different than those employed against the backwall.

Throughout the twentieth century the understanding of basic painting techniques that were dependent on the scenic piece’s stage position became a struggle, especially as some modern scenic designers failed to comprehend the complexity of the painted stage aesthetic, or the magic that could be produced by one. Simultaneously, the role of a nineteenth-century scenic artist who controlled the entire stage aesthetic transitioned to a twentieth-century scenic artist who painted another’s design (the scene designer). This transition compounded by scenic designers who were not trained as scenic artists became a challenge. In many cases it has continued to remain an obstacle when painted scenery is designed by those who do not paint, or fully understand painted illusion for the stage. It is not that these designers are unskilled, or that they are less valued by our industry, but it provides a challenge for many paint crews when a scenic designer visits a shop and sees a backdrop at close range, and not from the back of an auditorium. Simply stated, these designers are unable to fully comprehend either the possibilities or limitations of a two-dimensional composition and therefore, in many cases, avoid them. This lack of understanding has carried over into come current digital designs. In many cases a scenic artist should be used to help the designer translate his vision for the stage. One example is when computer renderings fail to depict a uniform light source, allowing random shadows and highlights to appear through the final product. With an inconsistent use of shadows and highlights, the dimensionality is destroyed, and the overall composition looks flat, or simply odd. The basic rules of scenic art for the stage still apply to digital backdrops.

Contemporary scenic art obstacles, however, are not solely the result of designers, lighting or technological innovations. Much has to do with training. All scenic art is not equal; it has never been equal, and America has supported two distinct schools of scenic art (see past posts about opaque painting versus glazing). In the end, whether it is hand-painted or digital the same questions need to be asked. Is the background or prop for live theater, film, theme parks, department store displays or some other exhibition space? Each one requires a different skill set. The individual designing and manufacturing the backdrop needs to understand that the final product is dependent on whether it is viewed from a distance or up close.

Another example of differing skill sets: backdrops for theatre and backdrops for film. Comparing these two is just like comparing apples to oranges. From the beginning, techniques used for scenic illusion on the stage did not successfully transfer to the movie industry, especially as the quality of film advanced throughout the twentieth century. This aesthetic shift for scenic artists was already in play during the first decade of the twentieth century – the early twentieth-century generation of scenic artists that had to figure artworks for a new format. They needed an even further division of value to help the painted scenery read on screen – in the beginning. When Harley Merry worked with Thomas Edison on some of the earliest films at the turn-of the century, new painting techniques were created to successfully read in this projected black and white format. Keep in mind that some of the early films also included Thomas G. Moses’ work for attractions at Coney Island. The distance from the camera to the painted setting, and from the screen to the audience, dictated the scenic artist’s painting technique at this time. By the mid-twentieth century, a scenic art system for film was partially in place for color.

Success in any form of scenic art is based on the continued study of the trade. There should never be a point when any artist says, “I have learned enough.” For centuries, scenic artists sought constant training, whether it is in the form of a class at the academy or a sketching trip with one’s contemporaries. We must continue to grow as artists, always studying the past while planning for the future. In many ways, today’s scenic artists are even closer to their nineteenth-century predecessors who successfully worked in a variety of industries throughout the duration of their career. Their income derived from many different venues, not simply painting backdrops for the stage, or working in a studio. It is an exciting time to be a scenic artist as change is the only constant thing we can expect.

To be continued…

Tales from a Scenic Artist and Scholar. Part 713 – The Art and Mystery of Scene Painting, 1902

The following is the third in a series of posts pertaining to the article “The Art and Mystery of Scene Painting,” published in “Britain at Work. A Pictorial Description of Our National Industries” by W. Wheeler, during 1902. Here is the final of three posts:

“When a manager, sometimes with help from the author, has roughly indicated the kind of scene he requires, the scene- painter makes a sketch, and if that is approved he proceeds to construct of cardboard a complete model, on a scale, say, of half an inch to the foot. It is here that the resourcefulness and inventiveness of the scene-painter are able to make themselves felt. The model shows every thing, down to the smallest detail — not only the landscape, but door and windows, those which have to open in the actual scene being made ” practicable ” in the model.

Image from “The Art and Mystery of Scene Painting,” published in “Britain at Work. A Pictorial Description of Our National Industries” by W. Wheeler in 1902.

“Wings “and “top-cloths” [borders] are also shown, and even the pulley and ropes which will be used in the adjustment of the scene are indicated. This part of the work, as may be supposed, calls for abundant patience, but its importance is manifest, and no scene-painter begrudges the time he has to spend upon his model, even when he knows that he will have to toil early and late to get the work finished by the stipulated time.

The model, when at last it is completed, is submitted to the manager’s consideration. It may be that he or the author desires some alteration, generally an in considerable one. When the modification has been made, the model is handed over to the master carpenter, who constructs the framework which is to receive the canvas. Having been affixed to the frame, the canvas is prepared by the painter’s labourers, whose business also it is to mix the colours. These are ground in water, by means of such a machine as is figured in one of our illustrations. Now the artist draws the design in chalk or char coal, and then the colours are filled in, always, as I have said, with due regard to the artificial conditions under which the picture has to be viewed, certain colours, therefore, which appear very differently in artificial light as compared with natural light, being avoided al together, or modified, as the case may be.

That scene-painting, like most other modes of earning one’s daily bread, is not without drawbacks, I am not prepared to assert. Strange indeed would it be if this were not so. The work, as the reader will know for himself, has a plentiful lack of regularity, and while both master painters and assistants often have to toil under heavy pressure to get their scenes ready by the eventful night, the assistants, at any rate, sometimes have periods of enforced leisure.

The attractions of the vocation, however, to those to whom the work itself is congenial, far outweigh this disadvantage. If the practitioner of the art is clever and resourceful, if he can not only wield the brush swiftly and deftly, but is also facile in inventing a scene from the manager’s brief hints, which is a much rarer gift, he in no long time may rise to distinction, besides being liberally rewarded in a pecuniary sense for his industry and skill”.

To be continued…

Tales from a Scenic Artist and Scholar. Part 712 – The Art and Mystery of Scene Painting, 1902

Part 712: The Art and Mystery of Scene Painting, 1902

Image from “The Art and Mystery of Scene Painting.” Published in “Britain at Work. A Pictorial Description of Our National Industries” by W. Wheeler, during 1902.

The following is the second in a series of posts pertaining to the article “The Art and Mystery of Scene Painting,” published in “Britain at Work. A Pictorial Description of Our National Industries” by W. Wheeler, during 1902. Here is part two of three posts:

“In former days each leading theatre had its own staff of scene-painters; now the rule is for the scenes to be distributed among several artists, regard being had, of course, to the special aptitudes of one just indicated, is that the work is no longer for the most part done in the theatres, but in buildings rented or acquired by the various artists, and by them adapted to their requirements. Almost the only exception to this rule is Drury Lane, which is such an enormous structure that there is room in it for at least some of the scenes that are presently to grace the stage to be painted “on the premises.” At Drury Lane, indeed, there is room for everything.

Other theatres have to store their scenes in railway arches, and so forth, and my readers will doubtless remember how not so very long ago a fire in one of these arches wrought havoc among the beautiful scenes which Sir Henry Irving had accumulated; but Drury Lane Henry Irving had accumulated; but Drury Lane.

This leads me to speak of yet another change that has come over the -” mystery ” of scene -painting. Formerly the canvas was spread on the floor, and the artist traced his designs with a brush having a handle long enough to permit of his standing over his work. The inconveniences of this modus operandi are obvious enough. In the first place, the work could only be done in a building with a large superficial area. The Covent Garden Opera House requires scenes seventy feet long by forty feet broad, and though the stage of Covent Garden is the largest in this country, scenes

for an average theatre have to be some forty feet by thirty-five feet. The position, too, was an awkward and tiring one for the painter, who must have known excellently well what backache means, and who was also reduced to the painful necessity of treading his work under foot. Now all these drawbacks are avoided by the simple expedient of a windlass and a slit in the floor, through which the canvas, attached to a frame, is raised or lowered so as to bring that part of it which is being operated upon at the moment on a level with the painter’s arm.

It is still necessary, of course, that the painter should have a fairly lofty building to work in, but he requires comparatively little floor space. In Macklin Street, between Holborn and Drury Lane, a large warehouse has been converted into painting rooms by two well-known scenic artists. Other scene-painters have appropriated and adapted such buildings as factories and mission chapels rather farther afield, where probably space is a less costly commodity than it is within a stone’s – throw of the Holborn Restaurant; and there is one painting room so far away from theatre-land as Lewisham. Mr. Bruce Smith, who works only for Drury Lane and Covent Garden — though he does not, of course, monopolize the contracts given out by these two theatres, since he is only capable of doing the work of two or three men and not of a round dozen — does some of his painting at Drury Lane; and, as he is one of those who can do two things at once, friends who call upon him here seldom find him too busy to have a chat.

Before passing on to describe how scene- painting is done, I should mention the rather curious circumstance that our ingenious neighbours across the Channel still paint on the floor. That they produce good results, at whatever inconvenience to themselves, may, to use one of their own idioms, go without saying, for so artistic and theatre-loving a nation as the French are not likely to be content with inferior work. Speaking generally and roughly, the French scene – painter aims, perhaps, at rather quieter effects than his English compeer, but it would require a robust patriotism to assert that they are less artistic.

To be continued…

Tales from a Scenic Artist and Scholar. Part 711 – The Art and Mystery of Scene Painting, 1902

Part 711: The Art and Mystery of Scene Painting, 1902

Scenic artists and their color palette. From the article by William Wheeler, “The Art and Mystery of Scene Painting,” 1902.

Grinding the dry pigment. From the article by William Wheeler, “The Art and Mystery of Scene Painting,” 1902.

The following is the first in a series of posts pertaining to the article “The Art and Mystery of Scene Painting,” published in “Britain at Work. A Pictorial Description of Our National Industries” during 1902. Here is part one of three posts:

“SCENE -PAINTING is, of course, an art as well as an avocation. The scene – painter, it is true, can aim only at broad effects; delicacy and subtlety he must not attempt. And to the conventions of the ordinary painter he has to add others arising out of the circumstance that his work has to be viewed from a distance, not only in artificial light, but often in artificial light that is tinted. This, however, does not make his work less an art; it is one difficulty the more to over come; and the best scene-painter, other things being equal, is the one who most successfully adapts his art to all the manager’s exacting requirements.

In these pages, however, it is with scene- painting as an avocation rather than as an art that we are primarily concerned. That those who rise to distinction in the profession are not unhandsomely remunerated for their skill and pains may be taken for granted. In these days so much depends upon the ” mounting ” of a piece — audiences have, as a result of long indulgence, come to expect so much in the way of scenic beauty — that it would be strange indeed if the men whose function it is to supply the demand had to complain of inadequate recompense in current coin. Nor does the work fail to bring some measure of glory to those who are mainly responsible for it.

Such names as Hawes Craven, Joseph Harker, Bruce Smith. VV. Telbin, R. Caney, W. Harford, Henry Emden, W. T. Hemsley, T. E. Ryan, and Walter Johnston are almost household words among that largest of all “the classes” who frequent the theatres. A fleeting kind of fame, no doubt. But so also is that of the actor. The greatest of those who tread the boards and nightly move multitudes to ecstasy have no sooner quitted the scenes of their triumphs than they begin to fade into abstractions, and if they remain anything more than mere names it is at least as much because, like David Garrick, they were personalities as on account of their histrionic genius.

Although some of the big cities of the provinces, such as Liverpool, Manchester, and Birmingham, have their own scene painters, the great centre of the profession is London ; and it is the scene-painters of the metropolis who for the most part furnish forth the scenery for those touring companies that carry successful plays into the country. Yet even in London— and even though during the last few years theatres have been springing up all over the town — the number of scene-painters is not considerable. Painters and assistants together do not, probably, number more than about a hundred. To these must be added the articled pupils; and although many of these have acquired a consider able degree of proficiency, one still marvels how so small a body of men contrives to get through such an enormous mass of work.

In former days each leading theatre had its own staff of scene-painters; now the rule is for the scenes to be distributed among several artists, regard being had, of course, to the special aptitudes of many of these have acquired a consider able degree of proficiency, one still marvels how so small a body of men contrives to get through such an enormous mass of work.

To be continued…